Question for Libertarians

[Tyme]

I understand most Libertarians think taxation is theft and shouldn't happen. I'm in agreement that it is essentially theft. With that said, it's the only way for government to operate. Without taxes there would be no roads, police, fire, military and a host of other worthwhile causes that we can all agree on. How do you reconcile your political beliefs with scripture? In particular, the scripture about give unto Caesar what is Caesar's and God what is God's.

[Guest MormonGator]

1) Libertarians (and I'm one of them) operate in a dream world. That's one of the many reasons that they'll achieve anything politically. 

2) In the dream world, a government would run on user fees-like a national park. I am NOT saying that that is practical, I'm just trying to tell you how a Libertarian might (key word, might) think. 

3) The government and the Book of Mormon have numerous passages about liberty-so one can easily be a libertarian and a Christian/LDS. 

4) You need to remember that there are differences between libertarians and anarchists. A libertarian would agree to some method of taxation in order to fund a government that would coin money, have a national defense, and enforce contract law. 

[Grunt]

5 minutes ago, Tyme said:

I understand most Libertarians think taxation is theft and shouldn't happen. I'm in agreement that it is essentially theft. With that said, it's the only way for government to operate. Without taxes there would be no roads, police, fire, military and a host of other worthwhile causes that we can all agree on. How do you reconcile your political beliefs with scripture? In particular, the scripture about give unto Caesar what is Caesar's and God what is God's.

We had roads, defense, and put out fires long before the government started robbing us.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

1) Libertarians (and I'm one of them) operate in a dream world. That's one of the many reasons that they'll achieve anything politically. 

I'm a libertarian.  And I believe that one reason why libertarians will not achieve anything politically is that they live in a dream world.  Too many of us are purists to the point where they do not accept societal realities.  They have such an idea of what freedom is that they don't recognize 2000 years of history that have brought us to where we are .  They also don't recognize that the level of tyranny which will run our government is directly proportional to the level of corruption in the society.

Libertarians who believe that government is the solution to all our problems are self-contradictory.

Quote

2) In the dream world, a government would run on user fees-like a national park. I am NOT saying that that is practical, I'm just trying to tell you how a Libertarian might (key word, might) think. 

Yup.  Don't forget that a use tax is a user-fee.  Such a tax would be perfectly within a libertarian ideology.

Quote

3) The government and the Book of Mormon have numerous passages about liberty-so one can easily be a libertarian and a Christian/LDS. 

Yup.

Quote

4) You need to remember that there are differences between libertarians and anarchists. A libertarian would agree to some method of taxation in order to fund a government that would coin money, have a national defense, and enforce contract law. 

They are different.  But I've noticed quite a bit of overlap.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Guest

[Guest MormonGator]

2 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I'm a libertarian.  And I believe that one reason why libertarians will not achieve anything politically is that they live in a dream world.  Too many of us are purists to the point where they do not accept societal realities. 

Yup, exactly my thoughts. Philosophically I agree with them 85% of the time. Politically I think they are delusional and basically worthless. 

[Tyme]

Interesting.

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

Libertarians believe that “income tax” is theft. The Federal Government should not have the power to tax people. That is for States and cities to decide.

Edited November 22, 2018 by Emmanuel Goldstein

[boxer]

3 hours ago, Tyme said:

 the scripture about give unto Caesar what is Caesar's and God what is God's.

That scripture is actually really brilliant. He actually isn't saying that one should pay taxes or one should not pay taxes. He is taking it from a very logical perspective.  Ceasar's image was on the coins, specifically because it literally was Caesar's money.  It was the coin of the realm.  People don't realize but Kings of old the Caesar's were actually private, i.e. the King literally owned it.  The King's highway-it was owned/maintained by the King.  The concept of "government" like we know today was unheard of hundreds of years ago. The Kings/Caesar were very, very rich men (who acquired wealth either through business or other means), they basically minted their own money from their own stores and then paid their employees with their own private coins.

So when Christ say's render under Caesar . . .literally Caesar created the money others used, so if you don't want to "render unto Caesar" don't use Caesar's money! He wasn't saying taxes are ethical. This is especially brilliant when considering that the Jews up until very recently in Christ's time were an independent nation.  They became subservient to Caesar and used Caesar's money so they paid taxes to Caesar.

One could almost see Christ's response as a call to action/revolt.  Basically telling the Jews, hey you guys sold your souls to the Romans, if you don't want to be taxed, don't use his money (i.e. revolt).  It's crazy how much meaning there is in a simple verse . . .

Edited November 22, 2018 by boxer

[Just_A_Guy]

12 hours ago, boxer said:

That scripture is actually really brilliant. He actually isn't saying that one should pay taxes or one should not pay taxes. He is taking it from a very logical perspective.  Ceasar's image was on the coins, specifically because it literally was Caesar's money.  It was the coin of the realm.  People don't realize but Kings of old the Caesar's were actually private, i.e. the King literally owned it.  The King's highway-it was owned/maintained by the King.  The concept of "government" like we know today was unheard of hundreds of years ago. The Kings/Caesar were very, very rich men (who acquired wealth either through business or other means), they basically minted their own money from their own stores and then paid their employees with their own private coins.

So when Christ say's render under Caesar . . .literally Caesar created the money others used, so if you don't want to "render unto Caesar" don't use Caesar's money! He wasn't saying taxes are ethical. This is especially brilliant when considering that the Jews up until very recently in Christ's time were an independent nation.  They became subservient to Caesar and used Caesar's money so they paid taxes to Caesar.

One could almost see Christ's response as a call to action/revolt.  Basically telling the Jews, hey you guys sold your souls to the Romans, if you don't want to be taxed, don't use his money (i.e. revolt).  It's crazy how much meaning there is in a simple verse . . .

It’s also worth noting that the question was a set-up, designed to get Christ in trouble with either one faction or the other.  The value of Jesus’ answer in this case is less about the principle He is supposedly teaching; and more about His rhetorical aptitude.  There are several incidents like this in the NT where Jesus avoids rhetorical traps by giving witty responses that, on a practical level, don’t really say a whole lot or don’t directly answer the question posed.  

Edited November 22, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[Guest]

13 hours ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

Libertarians believe that “income tax” is theft. The Federal Government should not have the power to tax people. That is for States and cities to decide.

Yes, to the first sentence.  No to the second.  The third is more complicated.

Income tax as it is currently set up is theft. That is true whether it is federal, state, local, or otherwise  More importantly, it is a government invoked penalty for earning money.  It essentially says that the government has the right to some of the money you made by your own labor.  In other words, "You didn't build that.  The government did."  This is immoral.

A use tax (one example) at any level gives the individual citizen the chance to say,"I want the government's oversight over this transaction.  So, if the deal goes south, I can call on the government to address my grievances.  It's a type of insurance policy that I'm able to choose at the point of purchase.  That's only ONE way that it can be considered an ethical tax.  There are others.

If I decide to go a different route (black market) where I don't pay such taxes, then I have no right to call on the government to address my grievances regarding that transaction. 

A capitation tax MAY also be moral.  This is supposed to be for public goods such as police, military, and elected officials to oversee police and military (among other constitutional services).  Since, theoretically, these types of services protect all citizens equally, it makes sense to tax everyone equally for these services.